Andres Freund pointed out that allowing non-superusers to run
"CREATE EXTENSION ... FROM unpackaged" has security risks, since
the unpackaged-to-1.0 scripts don't try to verify that the existing
objects they're modifying are what they expect. Just attaching such
objects to an extension doesn't seem too dangerous, but some of them
do more than that.
We could have resolved this, perhaps, by still requiring superuser
privilege to use the FROM option. However, it's fair to ask just what
we're accomplishing by continuing to lug the unpackaged-to-1.0 scripts
forward. None of them have received any real testing since 9.1 days,
so they may not even work anymore (even assuming that one could still
load the previous "loose" object definitions into a v13 database).
And an installation that's trying to go from pre-9.1 to v13 or later
in one jump is going to have worse compatibility problems than whether
there's a trivial way to convert their contrib modules into extension
style.
Hence, let's just drop both those scripts and the core-code support
for "CREATE EXTENSION ... FROM".
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20200213233015.r6rnubcvl4egdh5r@alap3.anarazel.de
When maintaining or merging patches, one of the most common sources
for conflicts are the list of objects in makefiles. Especially when
the split across lines has been changed on both sides, which is
somewhat common due to attempting to stay below 80 columns, those
conflicts are unnecessarily laborious to resolve.
By splitting, and alphabetically sorting, OBJS style lines into one
object per line, conflicts should be less frequent, and easier to
resolve when they still occur.
Author: Andres Freund
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20191029200901.vww4idgcxv74cwes@alap3.anarazel.de
In commits 9ff60273e3 and dbe2328959 I (tgl) fixed the
signatures of a bunch of contrib's GIN and GIST support functions so that
they would pass validation by the recently-added amvalidate functions.
The backend does not actually consult or check those signatures otherwise,
so I figured this was basically cosmetic and did not require an extension
version bump. However, Alexander Korotkov pointed out that that would
leave us in a pretty messy situation if we ever wanted to redefine those
functions later, because there wouldn't be a unique way to name them.
Since we're going to be bumping these extensions' versions anyway for
parallel-query cleanups, let's take care of this now.
Andreas Karlsson, adjusted for more search-path-safety by me
Patch introduces a concept of similarity over string and just a word from
another string.
Version of extension is not changed because 1.2 was already introduced in 9.6
release cycle, so, there wasn't a public version.
Author: Alexander Korotkov, Artur Zakirov
Prominent binaries already had this metadata. A handful of minor
binaries, such as pg_regress.exe, still lack it; efforts to eliminate
such exceptions are welcome.
Michael Paquier, reviewed by MauMau.
This works by extracting trigrams from the given regular expression,
in generally the same spirit as the previously-existing support for
LIKE searches, though of course the details are far more complicated.
Currently, only GIN indexes are supported. We might be able to make
it work with GiST indexes later.
The implementation includes adding API functions to backend/regex/
to provide a view of the search NFA created from a regular expression.
These functions are meant to be generic enough to be supportable in
a standalone version of the regex library, should that ever happen.
Alexander Korotkov, reviewed by Heikki Linnakangas and Tom Lane
This isn't fully tested as yet, in particular I'm not sure that the
"foo--unpackaged--1.0.sql" scripts are OK. But it's time to get some
buildfarm cycles on it.
sepgsql is not converted to an extension, mainly because it seems to
require a very nonstandard installation process.
Dimitri Fontaine and Tom Lane
installations whose pg_config program does not appear first in the PATH.
Per gripe from Eddie Stanley and subsequent discussions with Fabien Coelho
and others.
>
> The patch adds missing the "libpgport.a" file to the installation under
> "install-all-headers". It is needed by some contribs. I install the
> library in "pkglibdir", but I was wondering whether it should be "libdir"?
> I was wondering also whether it would make sense to have a "libpgport.so"?
>
> It fixes various macros which are used by contrib makefiles, especially
> libpq_*dir and LDFLAGS when used under PGXS. It seems to me that they are
> needed to
>
> It adds the ability to test and use PGXS with contribs, with "make
> USE_PGXS=1". Without the macro, this is exactly as before, there should be
> no difference, esp. wrt the vpath feature that seemed broken by previous
> submission. So it should not harm anybody, and it is useful at least to me.
>
> It fixes some inconsistencies in various contrib makefiles
> (useless override, ":=" instead of "=").
Fabien COELHO
--------------------------------------
The pg_trgm contrib module provides functions and index classes
for determining the similarity of text based on trigram
matching.